A skeptic’s view of man-made climate change

Gore predicted that arctic ice would disappear by 2013‚Äìhe’s still wrong.

To many of us, global warming or climate change as a serious concern is just more fake news, initiated and propagated by leftists, for the purposes of obtaining wealth for the few and the redistribution of wealth for many.

There has been too much political deceit going on to trust the claims, and there is also ample scientific proof to question these assertions.

Those of us on the other side of the climate change argument are not saying man is not changing climate at all, we just do not believe the extremely slight change is a danger to the world.

We know there is politics involved and we also know there is data tampering that exaggerates this need to put a strain on our economy for the sake of the so called dangerous climate change.

To start with, politicians promoting these claims want either a cap and trade bill or a carbon tax, which is nothing more than a plan to make energy more expensive through additional taxes or penalties. This should be the first red flag, as politicians are always looking for new ways to tax us.

We can also go to the much heralded book by Al Gore, “Earth In The Balance” and subsequent movie to find “the sky is falling” and the failed predictions of the political left.

Gore, the former senator and vice president, predicted that arctic ice would disappear by 2013. He was wrong then, he is still wrong and it is a good thing we did not make the drastic changes he was promoting.

To add, those in the Green Industry have gained much wealth through this propagation. Some of these Green Energy companies, like Tulsa billionaire, George Kaiser, are political donors.

Solar company, Solyndra, received a $535 million government loan, only to end in bankruptcy, leaving taxpayers with the bill and absolutely no product. And this was just a small portion of President Barack Obama’s $80 billion green energy programs.

As to the science used by those to make the serious climate change point, it is largely based on computer models.

From congressional hearings and testimony, the science that is obtained from actual collected temperature satellite readings shows no significant rise in temperature for the past 18 years.

Certainly true actual weather satellite temperature readings and history would be more accurate than any computer model.

As for the scientists who proclaim climate change is a serious concern, many have much to gain for doing so, and many also have much to lose, with the loss of funding or their job for doing so.

Then to persuade the public, these same politicians claim there is a 97 percent consensus with these same scientists.

But again from congressional hearings, we find this consensus has been found to be completely untrue.

As for what many other scientists believe to be true, this can be found in a dossier issued by the European Foundation. The document lists 100 scientific, historical and logical reasons why climate change is natural and contradicts man as any major cause.

Furthermore, according to NASA satellite instruments, the data reveals the earth’s polar caps have not receded at all since they began measuring the caps in 1979.

Moreover, some of the scientific evidence to prove the notion of excessive man-made global warming has been a result of data fabrication and data tampering.

What most scientists do agree on though is this, the earth’s climate and temperatures has changed radically during it’s 4.6 billion year history, but the earth has been much warmer than present for about 80 percent of earth’s history. And for much of this history man was not around.

That many of us do not believe the false narrative of serious man-caused climate change doesn’t mean we believe we shouldn’t do the best we can to promote a clean environment.

We all want a clean environment. It just means we believe we shouldn’t change our economy, our lifestyle or our way of life over this giant hoax on the public.

Louis J. DePetris is an electrical contractor from Jacksonville.

Source

Comments (4)

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Louis J. DePetris summarized the context of global warming scare industry perfectly .
    Congrats to the Florida Times for not being a quivering bowl of jello in allowing Mr.
    DePetris to express his view .

  • Avatar

    Russell Johnson

    |

    Bravo! Well said!
    AGW doesn’t pass the smell test let alone the physics test. I pity any of you who believe each molecule of CO2 is a red hot little furnace radiating down upon us.

  • Avatar

    G

    |

    Here’s a key quote from Depetris: “We all want a clean environment. It just means we believe we shouldn‚Äôt change our economy, our lifestyle or our way of life over this giant hoax on the public.” Exactly!

    In fact, mainstream conservatives should OWN the concept of environmental STEWARDSHIP. Stewardship rightly implies an ongoing responsibility to use our resources wisely, while left wing extremists try to argue that humans are not a part of the intended ecosystem, justifying a never ending list of crazy political demands. Give America a choice and they’ll go with stewardship every time.

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Amirlach Thank you for sharing the link to the FEB 14/17 Science Committee letter to NOAA . I like Mr. Smith . He is like one of those guard dogs that once they bite you can’t get them off . Way to go Science Committee nothing is going to get by you .
    Finally some daylight on the biggest fraud in history .

Comments are closed